Too bad nothing on that page says that modern Germans can understand Old English.

It says only that "there is much more in common between Old English and German, than between Modern English and German."

Of course, one can just as easily say that there is much more in common between Modern English and Sanskrit then between Modern English and Chinese, but that doesn't mean that speakers of Modern English understand Sanskrit, does it?

So you don't believe in God nor faith. Having faith is the act of belief no matter what you call it. Faith is real. Please stick to your science and leave faith to the faithful. Science can debate faith all it wants you won't disprove it.

<quoted text>You are the one who digressed from the topic. What a lying little hypocrite you are.And yes, when you make a positive statement in a debate you are the one who must supply the evidence that supports your argument. The other side merely has to point out that you made a statement without evidence.You have no idea how a scientific debate goes. We as evolutionists can supply all sorts of scientific evidence that supports the theory of evolution. You BY DEFINITION cannot provide scientific evidence that supports your side.Scientific evidence supports or refutes a scientific theory or hypothesis. Without a scientific theory or hypothesis scientific evidence does not apply. Your side is too afraid to come up with scientific hypotheses, and remember you need to have a hypothesis before it can become a theory, since hypotheses are testable.Though you cannot recreate "creation" if it occurred it should have left evidence behind. The observation of that evidence should enable you to make a hypothesis and when you have done that we can test it.Until then when it comes to scientific evidence you do not have any.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_evide...

<quoted text>Too bad nothing on that page says that modern Germans can understand Old English.

It says only that "there is much more in common between Old English and German, than between Modern English and German."

Of course, one can just as easily say that there is much more in common between Modern English and Sanskrit then between Modern English and Chinese, but that doesn't mean that speakers of Modern English understand Sanskrit, does it?

I'm afraid that Charlie's "authority" doesn't support his claim.

I was just providing a link. I have no idea what connects one language to another. Not my field of study you know.

Than you. The last week or so I have been running through the definition of scientific evidence with several of our creationist "friends". Though they are quick to agree that scientific evidence should be agreed upon by everyone. And some even agree with the definition of scientific evidence that allows evidence to be used regardless of personal biases. Yet when it comes to admitting that there is scientific evidence for evolution all of them, with the possible exception of Bat Foy, have gone straight into denial mode.

That shows that they lack basic honesty. There are creationists that will admit to the fact that scientific evidence supports evolution and yet they still believe creationism. Though deluded they are at least honest. Our group, sadly, is both deluded and dishonest.

<quoted text>So you don't believe in God nor faith. Having faith is the act of belief no matter what you call it. Faith is real. Please stick to your science and leave faith to the faithful. Science can debate faith all it wants you won't disprove it.

By all means, stay faithful. I hope all your dreams come true and you become that slave to He that sits upon the golden throne.

<quoted text>By all means, stay faithful. I hope all your dreams come true and you become that slave to He that sits upon the golden throne.

I'm not a slave to God I choose to serve. I choose to serve because God has been faithful to me. Being a Christian doesn't mean we all hate science and don't go to the doctor. I think science is neat and does some really cool stuff it saves lives and heals people. I have asthma I use an inhaler.

LOL, I found a new term in a Dawkins interview:http://old.richarddawkins.net/articles/646818...The term is "Tooth fairy agnostic". You grant that there may be a possibility of god's existence, but it is about the same as the odds of the tooth fairy existing.

Oh great, I've officially been defined, next time I fill out a form I know what to put under 'religeon'

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.